"Supreme Court: Presence of Diverse Ethnic Groups Doesn’t Violate Cultural Rights in Assam"

The Supreme Court, in a 4:1 majority decision, upheld the constitutional validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, 1955, which incorporates the Assam Accord. The court rejected the argument that granting citizenship to migrants from Bangladesh violates the cultural and linguistic rights of the Assamese people under Article 29 of the Constitution. Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, delivering the majority judgment, stated that the presence of different ethnic groups in a state does not necessarily infringe upon the right of the local population to preserve their culture and language. According to Section 6A, migrants from Bangladesh who entered Assam before January 1, 1966, are considered Indian citizens. Those who arrived between January 1, 1966, and March 25, 1971, can seek citizenship if they meet specific criteria, while those who entered after March 25, 1971, are classified as illegal migrants. The five-judge bench, including Justices DY Chandrachud, Surya Kant, MM Sundresh, JB Pardiwala, and Manoj Misra, delivered this verdict, with Justice Pardiwala dissenting, arguing that Section 6A should be declared unconstitutional prospectively. The petitioners contended that granting citizenship to migrants from Bangladesh would increase the Bengali population in Assam, thus threatening the cultural identity of the Assamese people. They argued that this influx would impact Assam's cultural and linguistic landscape. Justice Chandrachud rejected these claims, clarifying that Article 29(1) ensures the right to conserve culture, language, and script, but this right does not imply that the presence of other ethnic groups automatically hinders the ability to do so. He emphasized that the petitioners failed to prove that the mere presence of these groups prevents the Assamese people from protecting their cultural heritage. Additionally, the judgment highlighted various constitutional and legislative measures safeguarding Assamese cultural interests. These include the special provisions under Articles 244A and 371B, the Sixth Schedule for tribal areas, and the Assam Official Language Act, which officially recognizes Assamese while allowing Bengali usage in specific regions. Concluding the judgment, Chief Justice Chandrachud affirmed that the cultural and linguistic rights of Assam's citizens are adequately protected by these constitutional and statutory provisions, and Section 6A does not violate Article 29(1) of the Constitution. Case Title: In Re: Section 6A Citizenship Act 1955 www.legalmeet.in